The Hastings Standard Published Daily. THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1897. A PLEA FOR DECENCY.

Hastings Standard, Issue 268, 11 March 1897, Page 2

The Hastings Standard Published Daily.

THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1897. A PLEA FOR DECENCY.

For the cause that lacks assistance. For the wrongs that need resistance, For the future in the distance, And the good that we can do.

There appears to be no finality to the surprises that the Colonial Bank can give us. Every fresh case taken to the Supreme Court brings to light some new and startling disclosure, more incredible than any already made public. Like the clown in the circus, no sooner is one ear-splitting musical instrument taken away from him, than with a bland smile ho produces " anudder one," and so with the Colonial Bank, no sooner do we get accustomed to one corrupt act, then from the storehouse of financial rascality another and more serious offence is brought to light. The affairs of this moribund institution have been probed by two Parliamentary Committees, it has been several times before the Supreme Court, and in each case something sensational has been brought to light. When is this subject to reach its conclusion, when are the public to know all that they have a right to know. Blink the fact, how we may, it is nevertheless clear that some very powerful influences are at work to shield as much as possible those who .should be made to answer and suffer for long years of systematic frauds. However, little by little the facts are being brought to light in spite of the powerful influence, and the matter has now reached a stage when it is necessary to enter a plea for decency. Let the dirty linen be cleansed once and for ever, and we call upon the Government to take those steps which it alone can take to have an exhaustive enquiry made. Humid up the whole lot of the directors and higher officials of the Colonial Hank and submit them to a searching cro-s examination in the Supreme Court. Nothing else can or will satisfy the public. What is the good of company legislation which aims at being punitive, unless full advantage is taken to give effect to the law. Surely the Colonial Banks affairs, so far as they have Wll made public, give evidence of extreme commercial immorality. A public examination will serve the dual purposes of satisfying the public demand, and act as it warning to those who delight in devious methods in company manag* rut ut. The inspector-General in companies liquid item under the British Board of Trade in his annual report deal- especially with public examination.**, and the opinion of this expert i> worth noting. He places a high value upon publicity the true causes of company insolvency, and the irregylw practu'tb) which, as a rule, it is at cyui|»uis4. Sucb publicity he OghUy

maintains arouses public attention and forms public opinion ; it exercises a beneficial influence in favor of the growth of a higher tone of commercial morality ; it discourages irregular practices in financial circles. " Nothing," he states, " has conduced more tc these results than the object-lessons afforded by public examinations conducted in open court under the supervision of able and experienced Judges, and the still wider publicity afforded by the publication of these examinations in the press." We are led into making these remarks by reason of the fresh facts that are being elicited by the public examination of Mr Henry Mackenzie, the late general manager of the Colonial Bank and more recently of the Bank of New Zealand. We shall deal with the fresh evidence when • the examination is completed; in the meantime it will not be out of place to emphasise the absolute necessity that exists for the public examination of the others who were associated with, and were responsible for the past management of the Colonial Bank. It is a case for the Minister of Justice to undertake, and unless Ministers have some ulterior object in view, or actuated by personal feelings, the Government will intervene in the public interests. If the Government fail in their obvious duty, then indeed will there be ample reason for believing that the oft repeated assertion of the Opposition press, that the Ministrydare not interfere because Ministers are culpable, is something more than a hideous invention of the enemy.